MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4240169135 · doi:10.4037/nci.0b013e3182072684

APRN Regulation

2011· article· en· W4240169135 on OpenAlexaff
Carol Hartigan

Bibliographic record

VenueAACN Advanced Critical Care · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicNursing Roles and Practices
Canadian institutions123 Certification (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLicensureAccreditationMedicineCertificationPerspective (graphical)NursingStakeholderMedical educationEngineering ethicsPublic relationsPolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article describes the development of a new regulatory model for advanced practice nursing. The history of nursing licensure is detailed to provide a perspective of the differences in the way that advanced practice roles evolved as a result of external forces and patient needs without the direct control of regulators and the resulting variations in the interpretation and implementation of the roles nationwide. Key provisions of the new consensus model for regulation are detailed, along with implications for each of the main stakeholder groups: licensure, accreditation, certification, and education.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.027
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.039
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.142

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0270.039
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.004
Scholarly communication0.0140.006
Open science0.0040.006
Research integrity0.0170.016
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0400.024

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.111
GPT teacher head0.487
Teacher spread0.375 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAACN Advanced Critical CareSame topicNursing Roles and PracticesFrench-language works237,207